Choosing an engine?

[FrankK90989]

I tipped the canoe on my "9A" today and plan to order the finish kit on Monday.
Also engine time--- So now I start looking at all them Lycoming model numbers and yup they give me a headache.
Any one out there know the best model for 160 hp fixed pich prop with a fuel pump and dynafocal 1 mount?
A runout to rebuild or a clone are high on my list
Thanks
Frank

[AirWolf]

I don't know which engine is the best, but I installed an o-320-d2j in my plane, and the installation went well (so far...I haven't started it yet).

IMHO, look around and see what is out there. If you are trying to get an engine for a small amount of $$, you are probably not going to get the ideal engine (especially if the plane came off a Cessna, or other high-wing plane), but from what I have seen/heard, most engines can work.

When I started looking for engines, I called the major players (Aero Sport, Penn Yan, etc) and specifically with Bart at Aero Sport, I told him what I was building (9A), and he came up with an engine for me.

Hope this helps,

Ron
Rv-9A

[pierre smith]

Whatever you do, stay with a Lyc!! My buddy has an Eggy on his -7 that was signed off two months ago and has 1.5 hours on the tach!! ECU (computer) troubles and trouble codes that keep him grounded still! Plus excuses and ,more excuses when he should have had his 40 hours flown off by now. All this because he has his own strip and wanted to keep it there and burn mogas. The cost of the Eggenfellner ain't nuthin' to write home about either.
Pierre

[mlw450802]

Originally Posted by pierre smith

Whatever you do, stay with a Lyc!! My buddy has an Eggy on his -7 that was signed off two months ago and has 1.5 hours on the tach!! ECU (computer) troubles and trouble codes that keep him grounded still! Plus excuses and ,more excuses when he should have had his 40 hours flown off by now. All this because he has his own strip and wanted to keep it there and burn mogas. The cost of the Eggenfellner ain't nuthin' to write home about either.
Pierre

Pierre,
Has your friend posted his problems on the eggenfellner yahoo group?

They have quite a few guys there with lots of experience and may be able to help him. I follow the site regularly and have not noticed anyone with his kind of problems.

In fact, almost every single person flying with the egg sube seems to be extatically happy with their choice and they all talk about just turning the key and flying.
I think his problems may not be typical.

Have him check it out.

-Mike

[rv8ch]

In fact, almost every single person flying with the egg sube seems to be extatically happy with their choice and they all talk about just turning the key and flying.
I think his problems may not be typical.

As an Eggenfellner customer, I was curious about the reported problem, so I checked with Jan. Here is what he wrote me:

We visited with Ralph yesterday to correct a loose / possible damaged, #2 plug wire. Engine now runs like a clock Here are the pictures.

[gmcjetpilot]

If you want a Lycoming, which I would highly recommend, here is a Lycoming ref document to pick the model that you might use, looking for a used engine.

Lycoming Certified Engine Guide

For a 160HP O-320 look at engines starting with a suffix D1A. For a 150HP O-320 look at suffix E1A. I believe both of these O-320?s have Dynafocal 1 and cont?l prop. Not saying these are preferred but just an example. In fact they are in rare airplanes. You will have better luck finding a D2A or E2A, which are fixed pitch versions of the D1A & E1A. The most common are likely out of cessna 172's, E2J, D2G. Not sure about the fuel pump pad? I think the new ones are based on D1A and D2A, 160HP c/s prop & fixed versions.

From there many variations can be found. The big thing to look for is if it has constant speed/fixed prop capability and Dynafocal 1. Avoid conical mount engines, as they just are not as desirable. I know I had one in my RV-4, which was not terrible but lousy compared to a Dynafocal. Even if you go fixed pitch consider picking an engine with the ability to use a hydraulic prop, great for future upgrade or resale. Other suffix mean small changes in magnetos, accessory pads (could be important if fuel pump pad is not there) and carb or carb location. There are also FI versions listed. Also look at the back of the document for what airplanes use what engines. Also the H2AD is a OK engine with some past history of eating cams, but it's an odd ball so avoid it.

Of course you can get a new Lycoming for about $18.5K fixed, $18.8K const spd, brand new.

http://www.mattituck.com/index.html

Using a new engine ($18.5K), stock parts and FWF kit from van?s accessories ($3.25K), a Sensenich metal prop ($2K), you could have a very nice new engine set up for under $23.8K. This will give you 10-20 years of trouble free flying. A Lycoming will be easy to install, no dual electric fuel boost pumps, radiators and redundant electrical systems as with auto engines.

Price the cost of "other" engine kit with a prop (Eggy). You are looking at about $37K; you will need the $8-$9K electric prop to get decent performance from a Subie. Not picking on the Eggy Subie, but price is not a bargain compared to a Lycoming. Plus you will have better resale with a Lyc. Why? People who buy used homebuilts are less likely going to tinker and will use A&P's, who know Lycs, have the tools and parts, available at 1000's of airports across the land.

You will find unless the Subie is turbocharged the performance will be better with the Lycoming. Also a Lycoming RV will weigh up to 100lbs less! Even a turbocharger will only give real benefit above 12,000 feet and the SUbie advantage will be small. If you fly at +12K feet sucking O2 all the time, a turbo is nice to have. Of course turbos are available for the Lycoming as well. The Subie weight, as much as 100lbs more compared to a Lyc powered RV, is a bummer for payload/fuel. Check it out. The installed finished weights are much higher.

As far as smoothness and reliability, well I hear the Eggy is smooth. I can tell you a well-built Lyc with a balanced prop is smooth enough. As far as reliability there are over 41,000 Lycoming O-320/O-360's in service all over the world. How many Eggy's are out there, actually flying? There are 500 Subaru engines registered of all models, including the pushrod version.

Cheers George

[ddurakovich]

You seem to have already nailed down your minimum requirements, so look for any model that meets those!

Other than the '76' series engines (which current wisdom suggests avoiding unless......), most of the differences are in the details rather than applicability. Sure, a solid crank will avoid the recurrent inspections of the hollow ones, but that's a detail. Bendix vs. Slick mags, 3/8's vs 1/2" prop bolts (I assume in the -9 you don't plan on 'hanging on the prop very often) again are just details.

Most of the configurations out there were for a specific application, but for the most part the basic case/crank/accessory case configuration should work.

Pay attention to the guide George suggested, it's an excellent reference. A bit convoluted at times, but still excellent. Just use it as a referecnce every time you find a candidate engine to make sure there was nothing there that is a deal killer for you (like the H2AD!).

[cobra]

George,
Its obvious you like Lyc's, and that is fine, but I fail to understand why you think the ancient air cooled design is better technically than equivalent modern engineering, particularly with the POS antiqauated mechanical fuel injection system the "newer" hi-tech engines use. Please dont use the "because everyone uses them argument"- no technical merit there, only a historical bias. Chevrolet threw out mechanical fuel injection right after they tried it, and now carburation is rare, wonder why?

I dont have an engine-make bias formulated yet, but what I see technically in an air cooled engine are a lot of inherent disadvantages: high costs/low production, air cooling is prone to overheating under load, which requires loose part tolerences, which results in wear (poor longetivity) and tends to be vibration prone/rough running. The engines are limited to low rpm use because of its long stroke; the long stroke results in high internal mechanical stresses and heavy parts. The engines are not environmentally friendly; often limited to expensive 100 octane (often leaded) avgas to get any power without detonation with hot heads, and the lack of development/competition forces reliance on manual mixture controls, which results in excessive emissions and less than optimal mixture control (must balance overheating vs excessive fuel use) better done by computer control.

The only real pluses I see are the redundent systems in stock form (im not sure magnetos are a particularly good idea though) and easy c/s propeller installation, which the conversions can add if desired. The weight and fuel use issues are pretty much equal between the better designs, even when the reduction drives and cooling eqt is added. The automotive engines have big advantages in cost savings, engine and parts availability, engine durability, smoothness, high output without overheating due to water cooling, and they are constantly being improved because of the much higher production rates and inherent competition between manufacturers.

BTW, the eggy is a very good system, excessively expensive, but far from the only source; Subi's are probably the most common engine used these days in home-built planes and rotorcraft.

[N941WR]

If you get a good deal on an engine that isn't exaclty what you are looking for it might still work out.

I bought an O-290 (I know not the engine you want) that came out of a high wing Piper and thus it didn't have an engine driven fuel pump.

Some searching on the internet found a serviceable accessory case, cam gear, and "rod" to drive the fuel pump, total cost was under $250 plus the cost of some gaskets and the fuel pump. Make it less than $500.

For that I have an engine that will work great for my -9.

If you are even thinking of buying a rebuildable core, I suggest you buy the How to Rebuild a Lycoming Engine DVD from Mattituak. It doesn't cost much and will give you an idea of what is involved.

[RV7Guy]

Take it from someone who has taken a $25,000+ hit from an "alternative" engine company, DON'T DO IT. It was not Eggenfellner and he has a fine package. I am now firmly in the "put an airplane engine on an airplane" camp.

I now have a beautiful ECI IO360 on my almost completed 7. I'd have 300 hours on my plane if I'd just listened to those who tried to convince me to put an airplane engine on my plane.

The Lycs and clones may be old technology but they are technology that works. And, more importantly, they can be worked on virtually anywhere in world.

Darwin N. Barrie
P19